this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023
80 points (95.5% liked)

Canada

7230 readers
814 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Related Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.

🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.

💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
80
Self-checkout theft causing problems for retailers — and shoppers who despise receipt checks (www.cbc.ca)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
136 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I started using grocery self-checkouts during COVID, but I've kept using them because there's rarely a line (and I'm a misanthrope). I'd probably go back to using regular human checkouts if I had to dig through all my crap to prove what I bought.

Having said that, I've noticed myself making mistakes. I've accidentally failed to scan an item, and I've accidentally entered incorrect codes for produce. When I notice, I fix them, but I've probably missed a few.

I guess the easiest answer is for grocery chains to reinvest some of those windfall profits and hire more cashiers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I don't use self-checkouts in retail stores, and I hate that some stores, like Shoppers, will try so hard to direct me to one when I'm in the queue for the cashier. I have put down merch and walked out of stores over this stance, and I no longer visit some stores (like Shoppers).

I'm not entirely against automated purchase systems. A completely touchless system would get a pass from me. I am against retailers forcing their customers to manually scan and check-out their products though, all while treating them as untrustworthy by dictating where they can place their scanned merch, weighing the merch as it's scanned, and checking the receipts after doing so.

Obviously, none of this addresses the question of whether fully-automated retail spaces are actually good for the working class as a whole.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

My local No Frills has shut down their express lane and directs people to their newly built self checkout. It's basically the express lane except instead of the cashier scanning my items and taking the payment. I scan the items and give payment while a cashier hovers over my shoulder to make sure I'm not stealing anything

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yeah I agree. It’s a tough question, are trains good for horse stable workers? Like they might lose their jobs if people stop using horses.

What’s good for the working class as a whole is the end of bullshit work. You don’t argue to prop it up just because the system is shit, you argue to change the system.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

These don't end bullshit work though. They just mean that I am doing it myself, but still paying the same price for my groceries.

If I got a discount for doing the self checkout, since the company isn't paying a cashier, maybe it would be another story, but what they're actually doing is saving money on labour and passing those savings onto themselves.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What’s good for the working class as a whole is the end of bullshit work. You don’t argue to prop it up just because the system is shit, you argue to change the system.

I don't disagree with automation, which is why I mentioned checkout-free systems. Still, you must recognize that this technology could eliminate hundreds of thousands (millions?) of jobs within a very short period of time and would have significant ramifications on society.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Right, but only because we organize things in such a way that all of the gains from automation go to the owners only. If we restructured things so that enough of that value went to the workers that they still made enough money to live but worked less, no one would fight automation. We would universally see it as a blessing.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I agree. My comments made no arguments for or against automation. I only pointed out that the broader debate about its long-term impact on society is beyond the context of OP's post.

If we restructured things so that enough of that value went to the workers that they still made enough money to live but worked less, no one would fight automation.

Many of those workers would no longer be employed by the company, as they would now be surplus to requirements.

Between AI and robotics, millions will likely be surplused within the decade. Where will they go? Will the 55-year old cashier retrain to work in robotics? Will we mandate companies to find alternative positions? Will we finally tax the rich appropriately? Will we expand welfare? These are the kinds of questions I was alluding to in my original comment.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's where Universal Income becomes a thing. No one has to work, or so they tell us. Not sure how it's supposed to work, in all honesty

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Beats me, but I'd like to see what society could do if 90% of the profit arising from automation had to be paid into income support programs.